It seems we're entering a period where .01 bitcoin actually represents a decent amount of value, and rising.

I think this is psychologically limiting people, who feel they are moving around '.01' of something that was roughly what 1.00 was last year. This situation wouldn't be too bad if bitcoin was actually a known currency, but when people are fighting to grab a few bitcoins, I think there's an impediment to getting people to trade values of .1-.5 and such, so redenominating the currency would hopefully spur more usage.

I think it should be shifted two places to the right. This means that if bitcoin ever achieves trading parity with the US dollar, it would only need one more such shift, and if something only needs to be done twice, that's a good thing in my opinion.

I think it should be shifted two places to the right. This means that if bitcoin ever achieves trading parity with the US dollar, it would only need one more such shift, and if something only needs to be done twice, that's a good thing in my opinion.

I'm sorry, but one of us is confused. Bitcoin crosses parity with the US $ months ago.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

That wouldn't be how the term is normally used in relation to currencies.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

Andris i suggested something along your line here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9299.0 but i think its safe to assume it doesnt catch on. My impression is that there is too little concern for end user psychology in the still very technocratic thinking btc development community.

Andris i suggested something along your line here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9299.0 but i think its safe to assume it doesnt catch on. My impression is that there is too little concern for end user psychology in the still very technocratic thinking btc development community.

The client developers seem to be decent at psychology, or at least at UI design. Compared to other open distributed crypto-thingies, like Freenet or Tor, Bitcoin is dead simple to use.